Catchy trends not always advisable

639

Dear Joan:
I am President of a 100 million dollar company with 75 employees. I am a full advocate of employee involvement and I have worked throughout the growth of the business to educate and inform my employees so that they can feel like full participants in running this business.

And that's where my question lies. We have recently been engaged in a long, extensive process where each and every employee was involved in coming up with key policies for the business. Although it was a great process and one in which we earned a great payback of employee commitment and personal investment, I personally feel as if we've spent so much time doing this that we almost stopped paying attention to making our products! We were spending all our time on non-value added activity.

On another point, I see many companies pursuing "self-directed work teams" to their detriment. Perhaps I'm becoming a cynic but it seems to me that self-directed teams isn't the end all and be all. In fact, they often appear to be spending more time on administration than production.

So much seems to be overdone these days. Take the word "coaching" for example. Most employees don't know what it means. No wonder they're confused, it they watch some of the popular coaches on TV who scream at their players and argue with officials. Isn't "teaching" a better word? Why do we have to invent the buzzword of the month?

It's been my experience that people don't want or need as much information as some of the "open book" advocates are preaching. For instance, in a company I know, they have a database that is open and available to each employee on a kiosk. This database shows everyone's goals, job descriptions and so on. Few people actually use it.

In our company, I began making available all the financial information. And although this has generated excellent involvement and decision-making, when I shared too much detailed information, a civil war broke out between departments. They were demanding to know why one department's production was lower and, therefore, costing the company so much money.

Now we're just showing people the key numbers that are essential to understanding the business financials. Each person or group has simple charts and gets feedback on their work area so they can track production and quality in their area. These charts are basic and easy to use and they are effective.

If someone wants to learn more we give them more. And we don't allow any "recreational bitching." If they have a problem with something, they have to get involved in the solution.

I guess the question is, how much is too much? Am I just becoming a cynic? Have we gone over the deep end with all this clever management jargon and "new" management techniques? I'd be interested in your reaction and the reaction of your readers.

Answer:
I'm interested in readers' reactions, too. I suspect there are many who share your feelings. I don't think you're a cynic. In fact, I think you've discovered that the "flavor of the month" management jargon and techniques can do more harm than good. I agree with your conclusion that keeping things simple and relevant makes the most sense.

It's impressive that you have taken so much time to involve your employees but like all good things, it can be overdone. The danger would be if you would swing in the other direction and say, "We've been wasting too much time! This is a bunch of fluff! Let's get back to work!" You don't want to send the wrong message but you do want to regain balance.

I agree with your assessment about self-directed work teams. I don't think they are for every group. In the case of groups with heavy responsibility for production, administration can become a real interference and distraction. In cases like this, the group should find a hybrid solution rather than be 100 percent self-directed. In other words, it makes sense to have someone outside the group do some of the administration or rotate the tasks among group members, in order to free up other members to get the work done. Otherwise, the group tends to get mired in endless consensus decision-making on everything from scheduling to what kind of pencils to buy.

Coaching, for many, signals a new and more productive kind of managerial behavior.  I really applaud the idea of sharing the key financial numbers with your employees and having them track the key indicators for their jobs.  It’s a great way to “coach” employees on how the business is run and how they can help the company to be more profitable.  Often, owners don't want to start sharing information because they fear the reaction that you've described. It can be avoided if they take your advice and keep it simple.

I'm interested in what other readers think. Please e-mail your thoughts to info@joanlloyd.com.

Advanced Consulting Skills for HR Professionals is Joan Lloyd’s intensive, interactive full-day workshop for HR practitioners.  Human resources professionals—both functional experts and generalists—have a new found opportunity to act as internal consultants who can help their organizations with organizational changes, performance coaching, conflict mediation and other value-added services. This workshop focuses on giving HR professionals the tools and strategies they need to help their organizations as well as advance their careers.

As a participant, you will have an opportunity to work on the problems and opportunities you face in your own organization, as well as to hear innovative ideas from other organizations.  Few training opportunities provide this level of intimate, hands-on experience. Call us for information about having Joan Lloyd work with your HR Team (800) 348-1944.  (Occasionally, we run this workshop as an open enrollment training offering.  Subscribe to Joan Lloyd’s “Article of the Week,” where we announce these sessions, as they are scheduled.)